A Rapid Assessment of Kili Island - Sea Grant College Program

Executive SummaryKili is one of five mid-ocean platform islands within the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI). Onthe evenings of both January 20 th and 21 st 2011 large areas of the island were inundated as a resultof marine flooding. Two visits to Kili were undertaken along with a desktop study in order to furtherunderstand the physical drivers of the inundation event and the vulnerability of Kili to future inundation.Using both topographic surveys and community consultations the most inundation prone areas of theisland were mapped and found to be a central depression within the central sections of the island whichis occasionally connected directly to the ocean during high energy conditions. Topographic surveysrevealed the island to be low-lying, even relative to other islands in the RMI and is highly vulnerable tofuture inundation, be it from distant storms, seasonal high tides or sea-level rise.The January 2011 inundation event was driven by a combination of seasonally high tides, knownlocally as “king tides,” a region-wide super elevation of sea level as a result of La Niña conditions anda moderate energy wave event from the northwest. None of these conditions alone was particularlyunusual in terms of frequency or magnitude. However, the combination of all three occurring at onceresulted in a total water level that was high enough to breach the island berm on the northwest section ofthe island. The bulk of housing on Kili is located on higher elevation sections of the island. However, anumber of key assets including the school, airport and some housing are located in low-lying sections ofthe island which are highly vulnerable to inundation.Resident consultations suggest inadequate warning from central government weather and disasterauthorities and Kili-based local government officials and the Kili community. Wave models, La Niñapredictions and tide forecasts all suggested that late January 2011 was a period of high inundationrisk, yet for many in the community the event occurred without warning or notification. This reportrecommends the methods of communicating weather related risk needs strengthening in order to providethe community with opportunities to prepare for inundation events.Looking to the future, events such as the January 2011 inundation will occur with increasing frequencyand severity. Sea-level rise is expected to accelerate and planning for all future activities on Kili needs tocarefully consider not only the present day vulnerability, but also future vulnerability due to higher sealevels.i

KiliKili Island is one of only 5 mid-ocean reef platform islands in the Republic of the Marshall Islands(RMI). Mid-ocean reef platform islands are differentiated from atoll islands through the absence of alagoon. Typically these islands are small, and due to limited resources sustain relatively low populations.Kili is the southernmost platform island in the RMI located at 5°38’ N, 169°7’ E, approximately 280km WSW of the capitol island of Majuro. The post WWII history of Kili is both highly complexand contentious. Kili is home to a large population of Bikini Atoll Islanders relocated as a result ofradioactive contamination of their traditionalhome islands. Kili was never intended to serve asa permanent population base and given the sizeand relative paucity of resources, would unlikelysupport such a population if it were not for theissues surrounding resident’s traditional homeislands.Kili is approximately 2000 m long by 500 m wideand has a land area 1 of 0.78 km 2 (192.5 acres). Theisland is oriented along a NE-SW axis. The reefflat which surrounds the island is generally under100 m in width, although in the NW corner thereef exceeds 150 m in width. The 2011 populationof Kili is XXX, although the population is highlydynamic, with considerable movement betweenKili and Majuro.Figure 1. Map of the Marshall Islands showing Kili (5°38’N,169°07’E)ObjectivesKili was subjected to marine inundation on the evening of the 20 th and 21 st of January 2011. The aimof this study is to further understand the mechanisms responsible for this flooding and assess thevulnerability of Kili to future storm and sea-level rise driven inundation. Specific project objectivesinclude:• Assess the physical cause of the January 2011 event by examining the meteorological andoceanographic processes operating during the event.• Determine the extent of flooding based on a robust, community driven assessment of inundatedarea.• Rapidly assess the topography of Kili to better understand the physical characteristics of Kiliwhich contribute to the susceptibility to inundation• Discuss the vulnerability of Kili and provide recommendations for the RMI government, KBEgovernment and Kili community for actions which can mitigate future inundation impacts.Develop a training program to build the capacity of stakeholders in producing assessments ofcoastal inundation events and recording this information on digital maps.1

Figure 2. Aerial photo of Kili, 1945.Figure 3. Satellite image of Kili, 2005. Copyright Digital Globe 2011, all rights reserved.Figure 4. Map of Kili based on features derived from 2006 satellite imagery.2

Oceanographic/Climate Drivers ofthe January 2011 Inundation EventLocal Sea-Level RiseBy Pacific standards, RMI has a lengthy and largely complete sea level record. Currently tide gauges areoperating at Kwajalein and Majuro atolls. The Kwajalein record extends from June 1946 until present,whereas the Majuro record is a function of two separate records collected by the University of Hawai‘iSea Level Center (UHSLC) between October 1968 and December 1999 and by the Australian NationalTidal Facility from June 1993 until present. Figure 5 presents the combined Majuro dataset supplied bythe UHSLC 2 . A linear regression through the monthly data series shows an annual sea level trend of 3.0mm yr -1 this equates to 1 inch of sea-level rise every 8-9 years and is consistent with global averages.Although the record of sea-level rise is measured at Majuro it is likely that sea-level rise at Kili followsthis general trend.ENSOThe El Niño Southern Oscillation(ENSO) index is a relative indexused to determine the current phaseof the El Niño/La Niña cycle.Figure 6 shows the multivariateENSO index calculated by NOAA 3 .Positive values indicate El Niñoconditions; while negative indicateLa Niña conditions. In the RMI ElNiño is associated with sea levelswhich are typically lower than meanconditions. Conversely, under LaNiña conditions sea level is typicallyhigher than the normal sea level.During the January 2011, moderateFigure 5. Long term sea level record from Majuro showing sea level rising at ~3.0to strong La Niña conditions weremm yr -1 since 1968.present. As a result, the sea levelaround the RMI was ~10 cm higher than typically encountered (Figure 7). Figure 7 show the Pacificwide sea level anomaly, the anomaly is the difference between the monthly sea level for January 2011and the average sea level between 1993 and 2010.Figure 6. Multivariate ENSO index used to determine the current phase (El Niño or La Niña) of the ENSO cycle.During early 2011 a moderate to strong La Niña conditions existed.3

Between April 2009 and August2011 a wave buoy deployedoff Delap point, Majuro 4 . Thisbuoy, deployed as part of aNational Science Foundationproject lead by the Universityof Hawai‘i provides real-timemeasurements of ocean waves.The buoy is directional, whichmeans not only does it measurethe height and period of thewaves, but also the directionthe waves are coming from.Calculations can also determineif waves from multipledirections are impacting thebuoy. For example a storm inthe north Pacific might generatea northerly swell with a periodof 15 seconds at the same timeFigure 9. Output of Wave Watch 3 wave model on 1/20/2011 18:00 showing moderate as locally generated wind wavesnorth north-westerly swell.coming from the east with adifferent period. The wave buoy provides a means for calculating the wave heights and transmitting thisinformation to the users on the internet.Between January 20 th and the 22 nd the wave conditions in Majuro (and assumed for Kili) werecharacterized by long-period swell waves approaching from the north (Figure 10). Wave heightswere not unusually high during the period of flooding, although Hs 5 peaked at over 2.0 m on severaloccasions.Figure 10. Wave height and peak period between 12:30 pm on 1/20/2011 and 12 pm on 1/22/2011. Wave conditions were characterizedby long period waves between 1.5 m and 2.0 m. Long period waves are generally generated from distant weather events and are morelikely to cause inundation than short period waves.5

SummaryThe sea level during the January 2011 inundation event was unusually high, probably amongst thehighest non-storm driven sea level encountered within the recent history of Kili. Seasonally highastronomical tides were further amplified by La Niña conditions. At the time of the inundation waveconditions were moderately energetic, while not an unusual or rare event, when all climate andoceanographic factors occur in unison sea level at Kili was elevated to a level that result in widespreadinundation.Physical Impacts of January 2011Inundation EventConsultations with the community suggest waves breached the low point in the island ridge on thenorthwestern section of the island and proceeded to inundate areas to the east extending as far as theairport runway. Historically, a low, swampy area existed in areas of the central core of the island, similarto that seen on other reef platform islands such as Jabat. It appears water entered through the breachand proceeded to raise the water level of the swamp which in turn flooded low-lying areas. The area ofoverwash is characterized by the deposit of sand gravel washed from the reef, beach and island ridge onto the island surface (Figures 11 and 12).No accurate quantitative measures of the vertical flood level or spatial extent of flooding were madeat the time of the event. However, community consultations indicate large areas of the island wereinundated as a result of salt water incursion through the swamp in the northwest section of Kili. InOctober, 2011 a follow up event assessment was undertaken using a community-based, scientificassessment to map the extent of the flooded area. Such an approach is quick, simple and utilizes thecollective experience of community to provide powerful information after an event.Figure 11. Large area of overwash on the NW side of Kili. Coral rubble and debris were washed as far as 60 m from the island ridge.This low point in the island is likely the historic channel between the swamp and the reef flat; as a result, it is a highly vulnerable tobreaching during high tides and wave events. Direction of flood water indicated by red arrow.MethodologyLarge satellite image prints of Kili were presented to small groups (2-5 people) of the communitymembers who were present on Kili during the January 2011 inundation event. Community memberswere instructed to shade the areas of the island they recalled were flooded during the January 2011event. Typically the groups discussed the event at length and appointed one member to draw on thesatellite image with the collective agreement of the group. In total 15 groups were interviewed for theassessment. Resultant outputs were photographed for later analysis (Figure 13A).6

Photographs were then loaded within ArcGIS 6 andthe shaded areas digitized as polygons (Figure 13B).Individual polygons were then analyzed in ArcGISto map the “collective wisdom” of the 15 groups todetermine the flood extent. This involved performinga union of the 15 polygons; this essentially joinsall polygons together into one larger polygon. Eachsection of this larger polygon then has a valueranging between zero and 15. Zero indicates that nogroups identified an area as a flooded zone, whereasa value of 15 indicates every group identified this asa flooded zone.Figure 12. Area of overwash on the NW side of Kili.AResultsFigure 14 presents the results of the analysis ofthe 15 community groups interviewed in thisanalysis. Results suggest a high level (100%) of thecommunity identified the low-elevation swamp as anarea subjected to flooding. A large proportion of thegroups surveyed indicated that a significant area ofthe central core of the island as subjected to flooding.Conversely, no groups indicated that the majority ofthe densely populated coastal village was flooded.BFigure 13. Example of community group assessment of the flooded areas of Kili during the January 2011 inundation event. Panel Ashows the area shaded by a community group and B shows a digitized polygon of flooding extent.Land Elevation Data7One of the most efficient and effective ways of measuring island height (elevation) is through landsurveying. A simple survey approach is to make 2-dimensional profiles that extend from the reef toisland surface. A 2-dimensional profile consists of measuring the elevation and distance (relative tothe known point) which when combined gives us the form (topography) of the land. A 2-dimensionalprofile (or island profile) is simply a cross-section of the reef and land collected using survey equipment.It is usually plotted as a scatter graph with connected lines. The x-axis is distance, while the y-axisis elevation (see Figure 16 for an example). If you survey the same profile line at least twice you canestablish whether there has been any change. This change can either be through erosion (loss of land) oraccretion (gaining land).

Figure 14. Level of collective community agreement of flooded areas as a result of the January 2011 inundationevent. The color ramp ranges from blue (low agreement) to red (high agreement) and suggests the central coreof the island and the low-elevation swamp in the NW section of the island was considered most likely flooded.MethodologyA rapid (2 day) assessment of island elevation was concentrated on the populated section of Kili towardthe southwest section of the island. The survey consisted of establishing a network of benchmarks, orpoints of known position and elevation. From these points the elevation of a number of locations can bemeasured relative to a known datum. Typically the datum on such a survey would be Mean Sea Level(MSL); however MSL is typically calculated from a tide gauge record or at a minimum, secondary tidalpredications. Kili has neither a tide gauge, nor secondary tidal predictions calculated. As a result, thesurvey team opted to use reef flat elevation as the vertical datum. Reef flat elevation typically reflectsthe Mean Lowest Low Water (MLLW) level, as reef flat growth is restricted by aerial exposure. Ideally,elevations would be expressed relative to MSL, however, in rapid assessment of this nature it is notalways possible to reduce elevations to MSL. When projecting the future impacts of sea-level riseor storms the relative differences in elevation are more critical for the decision making process thanabsolute measures of elevation.ResultsTwo cross-island profiles were surveyed at locations presented in Figures 16A and 16B. Due to tidelevels it was not possible to extend profile B on to the western reef flat. However, profile B extendedacross the island from the western ridge to the eastern reef flat. Results indicate that the western ridge ishighest point of relief on both profiles A and B. Further observations indicate that this trend extends formost of the west coast of Kili. The western ridge is approximately 3.5 – 4.5 m above MLLW. Eastwardfrom the ridge the terrain dips noticeably, much of the central section of the island is 2 – 3 m aboveMLLW. Profile C extends across the overwash deposit which remained after the January 2011 inundationevent. The profile extends from the edge of the swamp, across the deposit and over the ridge on to thebeach. Figure 17 presents a simplified topographic contour of the village on Kili. This figure is not ascientific contouring of the land area as not enough data was collected to enable this. It is intended to8

Figure 15. Location of elevation measurements made on Kili.reflect the general topography of the populated area of the island and is useful to guide future work. Thehighest elevation area is the “hill” on which the church is located with a maximum elevation of over 7 mabove MLLW. This area of higher elevation is relatively small, with most of the village below 4 m aboveMLLW. The current development of the village reflects the area of highest elevation and there is verylittle elevated land that has not been developed or built upon.Recent work undertaken on Jabat, a similar sized reef platform island showed the island ridge on thewestern side of Jabat to range between 2.755 m and 6.3 m above mean low lowest water (MLLW) level.Kili is significantly lower in elevation than Jabat with island ridge on the western side of Kili rangingbetween 3.62 m and 4.334 m above MLLW. The highest ground level on Kili is the foundation of thechurch which is 8.47 m above MLLW.9

WestProfile AEastProfile BArtificial ridgeProfile CEdge of swampFigure 16. Cross-island elevation profiles A, B, and C, relative to MLLW.10

Figure 17. Generalized contouring of surveyed area of Kili, relative to the reef crest (MLLW).Future Vulnerability of KiliSea-Level RiseSea level has been rising in RMI at a rate of about 3.0 mm/yr, that’s about 1 inch every 8.5 years (Figure18). Sea-level rise will increase both the frequency and magnitude of flooding caused by high tides andstorms. There are a variety of scenarios as to the rate of sea-level rise. This project suggests adoptingthe Intergovernmental Panel for ClimateChange (IPCC) upper level scenario of 59cm by the year 2100 7,8 . Keep in mind thatscenarios are revised every few years asthe scientific understanding of sea-levelrise improves. Many planning authoritiesare opting for a more conservativeapproach and projecting the impacts of100 cm of sea-level rise by 2100. The RMIgovernment and KBE government shouldbe aware of the potential for the IPCC toadjust scenarios and should be prepared toadjust planning accordingly.Figure 18. Observed and projected relative sea-level change near the Marshall Islands. The observed sea level records are indicated indark blue (relative tide-gauge observations) and light blue (the satellite record since 1993). Reconstructed estimates of sea level nearthe Marshall Islands (since 1950) are shown in purple. The projections for the A1B (medium) emissions scenario (representing 90% ofthe range of models) are shown by the shaded green region from 1990 to 2100. The dashed lines are an estimate of 90% of the rangeof natural year- to-year variability in sea level. Taken from PCCSP report11

Sea Level Variability and TrendsFuture sea-level rise will cause an increase in the frequency and magnitude of flooding at Kili. Thisgenerally means flooding of the nature of the January 2011 event will happen more often and it will bemore severe. Future sea-level rise will likely flood larger areas of the island more regularly. However,there will be a lot of variability in when flooding will occur. The January 2011 event showed the impactof La Niña on elevating sea level. Likewise, during some years (usually El Niño years) the sea level willbe temporarily lower and the risk of flooding reduced, but not removed.How vulnerable is Kili to storms and sea-level rise?When examining the vulnerability of an island it is important to consider the factors which ultimatelydetermine the vulnerability. A formula to calculate or simply consider factors contributing to the islandvulnerability is given by:Vulnerability = (exposure + sensitivity) – adaptive capacityWhere the following factors are considered:Exposure-Sensitivity-Adaptive capacity-To what extent an asset is exposed to a hazard. i.e., is an island exposed toinundation? How exposed? i.e., Kili vs Big Island of Hawai‘i.Does this exposure matter? i.e., an air conditioning unit is highly sensitive toflooding.How well can you respond to the impact? i.e., Majuro has a much higher adaptivecapacity to deal with inundation than Wotje as it has access to materials andtrained personnel required for an organized response and mitigation planning.This study largely examined the physical exposure of Kili to inundation hazards driven by storms andsea-level rise. A unique comparison to Kili is provided by Jabat Island, a similarly sized mid-oceanreef platform island. Table 1 provides a general comparison between the factors contributing to thevulnerability of Kili and Jabat Islands.Recommendations for ImprovedCommunity Hazard ResilienceThe inundation of Kili during January of 2011 was caused by a moderate energy swell event in unisonwith spring tides, which were superimposed over a temporary, regional rise in sea level as a result of LaNiña conditions as well as a long-term global rise of sea level. When combined these factors elevatedsea level and caused waves to breach the island ridge. As a result, a heavily modified swamp was floodedwith salt water, which ultimately inundated large areas of the island. Several key community hazardmitigation recommendations from the visit have been made for further review and discussion.• There is a need for increased awareness of coastal hazards and potential mitigation strategieswithin the Kili community. Strengthening the communities understanding of both climate andnon-climatic stressors on the Kili environment.12

Table 1. A generalized comparison of the vulnerability of Kili and Jabat to contemporary and future impacts of storm and sea-level risedriven flooding.ExposureSensitivityAdaptivecapacityVulnerabilityKILIModerate:Low-lying island with existing swampwhich regularly receives salt water input.Moderate wave energy environment.Infrequent storms.Moderate:Low dependence on locally grown food,inundation damage to crops is not a criticalfood security issue. Electrical supplysystem has resulted in wide spread uptakeof electrical appliances, air conditioningetc, which are highly sensitive to saltwater.Likewise trucks, cars, heavy equipment arehighly sensitive to saltwater exposure. Highpopulation density.Moderate-high:Access to heavy equipment to aid inresponse. Runway for emergency relief.Large population. Greater financialresources.High:Highly exposed to inundation hazardswhich are expected to increase in frequencyand magnitude. A number of highlysensitive assets which can be severelyimpacted by inundation. Higher level ofadaptive capacity to mitigate impacts,respond and adapt.JABATModerate:Low-lying island, although higher thanKili. Moderate wave energy environment,slightly more energetic than Kili. Infrequentstorms.Moderate:Moderate dependence on locally grownfood, so crop damage has an impact on foodsecurity. Little use of electricity so impactson households of minor inundation areminimal. Low population density.Low:Low population with low capacity torespond to inundation events. Difficultlocation to access and provide relief.Moderate:Less exposed, less sensitive, lower adaptivecapacity• There is a need for improved forecasting of inundation events throughout RMI, particularlyin the outer-islands. The community should have received advanced notice of the high likelihoodof inundation during this event. ENSO guidance is issued quarterly 10 and distributed to theRMI government and its agencies. This guidance predicted higher than normal water levelsover the 2010/2011 winter. The elevated tide levels were predicted and wave models wouldhave provided a forecast of the arrival of long period waves from the north-northwest. If thecommunity was adequately warned simple preparations for the event including moving electricalequipment above likely flood level and ensuring adequate levels of food and drinking waterwere available could have been made in anticipation. Kili has access to cellular and internetbasedtelecommunication technology not generally available to other outer-islands. As such, Kilishould be amongst the most well informed communities when it comes to receiving weatherinformation and warnings. However, at the time of the October 2011 assessment communicationswere unreliable. As such, the purchase of satellite telephone should be considered as temporary13

ANNEX 1Community AdaptationFigure 19. Profile view of a conceptual island with lagoonal and ocean side setback zones and raised floor levels, allows for naturalisland movement.How to adapt property:Basic ways to adapt a community against erosion include set-back zones and raising property floorlevel. Setback zones allow a shoreline to migrate according to seasons and storm events. Setback zonesshould be considered for new developments on lagoonal and ocean shoreline. Raising floor level allowsflood water to flow under property with minimal damage or risk. Areas with exposure to inundationcould be zoned as flood zones with a minimum elevation established for the bottom of the building as iscommonly done in the United States through the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps 11 .Design Considerations and options:• A risk assessment should be carried out along all shoreline, evaluating the state of erosion or riskof inundation.• A systematic approach to warning the Kili community of potential inundation events. Outlinedbelow.• Leaving a native vegetation buffer will increase the level of protection and stabilize the shoreline.• All new houses to be constructed on poles with a floor level a minimum 1m or higher aboveground level.• All replacement air conditioning units to be installed at least 1 m above ground level.• All households should have a flood emergency plan, including keeping food, water and nonelectrified(gas) cooking apparatus in their house.• All households should have equipment necessary to elevate electrical appliances, particularlyrefridgerators and ovens/ranges at least 1 m above floor level. This could consist of concreteblocks and sturdy plywood base that can be installed below the appliance in the event ofinundation.• Raise community awareness about what to do in the event of a flood and actions that can betaken to mitigate some of the impacts of the inundation events.• Develop a plan with the church leaders to utilize the elevated church facility as a shelter withbasic supplies stored there.• Designate a community leader to maintain telecommunication equipment, communicatewarnings and educate the community on these measures.15

ANNEX 2A Simple Plan for Inundation Prediction, Warning, and ResponseConsultations with community suggest few people were aware of the immediate potential of inundationassociated with the January event. The lack of adequate warning or notification of the potential forinundation was a key concern raised during the October assessment. While there are many variableswhich determine the frequency and magnitude of inundation there are underlying conditions whichincrease the risk of inundation. This increased risk needs to be effectively communicated to the Kilicommunity in order for adequate preparations to be implemented to mitigate potential impacts. Thefollowing is a suggested course of action which could be modified for the KBE government and Kilicommunity, consider it the starting point for discussion rather than a implementable plan. The systemutilizes long range forecasts of sea level based on tidal predictions and ENSO outlooks, combined withwave forecasts issued by the National Weather Service (NWS). A simple scheme is proposed wherebydays are classified as yellow, orange or red based on the potential risk of inundation. The schemeproposes potential actions to be taken by the National Disaster Committee, KBE government and Kilicommunity based on the potential for inundation.Red days• Maximum tidal level exceeds that typically associated with tidal inundation.• An orange day coinciding with a predicted significant swell event as defined by NWS.• Any meterological or oceanographic warning issued by NWS or National Disaster Office.Orange days• Maximum tidal elevation is below the level associated with flooding. However, the dayfollowing or the day preceding red days should be classified orange to allow carefulmonitoring of ocean conditions.Yellow days• Maximum tide level is below that typically associated with a breach of the island ridgewhich separates the swamp from the beach. (determine value based on historic events).If this was to be undertaken in Majuro (see Figure 20) a water level below 2.00 m abovetide gauge zero would constitute a yellow day.Suggested actions by the National Disaster Office/NWS, KBE government and local community areoutlined in Table 2.16

Table 2. Suggested actions to be undertaken by RMI government, KBE government, and Kili community to better prepare forhazardous inundation events.YELLOW ORANGE REDNational WeatherService/NationalDisaster OfficeMaintain/deliver forecastsprovide quarterly ENSOguidance.Maintain/deliverforecasts. Provide swelloutlookMaintain/deliverforecasts. Provide swelloutlook (timing andsize). Maintain contactwith KBE hazards teamto document possibleimpactsAdvise community ofnecessary preparations.Document event. Providefeedback to NationalDisaster Office.KBEGovernmentHazards TeamEnsure communityis aware of hazardsand preparations thecommunity should bemakingObserve flood proneareas 3 hrs, 1 hr and 0hours before high tide. Ifflooding appears likelyadvise community andNational Disaster Office.Ensure adequate suppliesof food, water, cookingequipment are availablein the event of a disaster.Prepare to receiveguidance from Hazardsteam.Kili CommunityEnsure adequate suppliesof food, water, cookingequipment are available inthe event of a disaster.Prepare to raise allelectrical appliances offground level. Prepare aplan on how to reach safepart of the island.17

References1Measured using the edge of vegetation line from a 2005 satellite image.2http://ilikai.soest.hawaii.edu/uhslc/3http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/people/klaus.wolter/MEI/4Currently the Majuro wave buoy is inactive due to maintenance requirements, it is anticipated that itwill be redeployed in 2012.5Hs refers to Significant wave height. It is the average height of the highest 33% of waves measuredand is the most common measure of wave height used. Peak or maximum wave height would beconsiderably higher than Hs.6ArcGIS is a Geographic Information System (GIS). It is a high performance suite of tool for geographicand spatial information analysis. Within the RMI certain government agencies (RMIEPA, OEPPC andEPPSO) have GIS tools and experienced users.7http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-6-5.html8http://www.cawcr.gov.au/projects/PCCSP/Nov/Vol2_Ch7_Marshallislands1.pdf9http://www.cawcr.gov.au/projects/PCCSP/pdf/8_PCCSP_Marshall_Islands_8pp.pdf The Australianrun Pacific Climate Change Science Program (PCCSP) and local meteorological agencies produced asummary on climate change in the RMI which is appended to this document10http://www.prh.noaa.gov/peac/update.php11http://www.fema.gov/hazard/map/firm.shtm19

AcknowledgementsA report prepared by Dr. Murray Ford, University of Hawai‘i Sea Grant College Program. The viewsexpressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the University of Hawai‘iSea Grant College Program, NOAA, College of the Marshall Islands or any other supporting agencies.Project support provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Coastal StormsProgram through an institutional grant.UNIHI-SEAGRANT-TT-11-0620